Anne Flanigan Bassi – Challenged by Fiscal Responsibility

I like County Commissioner and Lake County Forest Preserve Board member Anne Flanigan Bassi. I’m glad she was recently re-elected. Which is all the more reason why I am disappointed in the position she has taken supporting the proposed development of the misguided Fort Sheridan golf course. Now I’m not disappointed in a pouty way because Commissioner Bassi doesn’t agree with me. Rather, what Commissioner Bassi has done is generally known as misdirection. It is disingenuous. And it is also wrong.

Throughout this miserable Fort Sheridan land use dispute ordeal and until the final meeting of the Advisory Committee, Commissioner Bassi has held her cards close to the vest. The only position she revealed to all sides, and at every opportunity, was that the decision had to be fiscally responsible. But in the end, the solution she has supported is not fiscally responsible. In fact it provides the prospect of unending loss and reduction of services in neighboring communities – according to those communities.

Commissioner Bassi has chosen to support the development of a golf course by inviting private operators to bid on developing and operating the course under a land-lease arrangement. In so choosing, Commissioner Bassi would like it to appear that the burden is off the public. In sum her position seems fiscally responsible. But Commissioner Bassi has misdirected us to the wrong conclusion.  Because there is more to the story.

Projected Annual Loss of Revenue by Municipal Golf Courses

Chart of projected municipal golf course losses caused by the Fort Sheridan golf course
$500,000 to $1,000,000 annual losses to municipal golf course due to the proposed Fort Sheridan golf course

If a golf course is built at Fort Sheridan, it will cost the surrounding municipal golf courses between $500,000 and $1,000,000 each year in lost revenue. It is speculative how long this lost revenue impact would occur. The Lake Bluff Park District said, “…the impact (would) result in less services to the Lake Bluff community.” The City of Lake Forest said, “City of Lake Forest is not going to support a bid that basically kills the City of Lake Forest golf course.”

Wow. “Less services”, “Kills the golf course” That doesn’t sound to me like a decision was made by Lake County Commissioner Anne Flanigan Bassi to be fiscally responsible. To her own constituents. In her own district. Who just re-elected her. Ooof.

And now you know the rest of the story.

Listen to Lake County Commissioner Anne Flanigan Bassi tell us how important fiscal responsibility is to her:


15 thoughts on “Anne Flanigan Bassi – Challenged by Fiscal Responsibility

  1. Dear Ima Non Golfer and Sonny,

    I apologize for taking so long to respond to Ima. I am glad to see that I am responding to Sonny in a timely fashion.

    First, to Ima. If the Lake County Forest preserve could simply ask for an amendment to the covnenant why haven’t they done so? If it were that simple, wouldn’t you think in all these years of debate about the golf course they would have done so and put this “issue” to bed? It would seem the most politic thing to do. And yet, it has not been done. I would guess since they have not done that and the convenant remains your contention that it is “simple” is incorrect.

    Which brings me to Sonny’s last comment. While I appreciate the thank you’s and I understand this is a different time as the convenant stands, your assertion that “Golf is not part of the picture.” may be a bit premature.

    I will stand by my remarks that the LCFP have not shared with the general public what their plans are. If they have made the plan to simply build a washroom that has not been put before the public. To date they do not have well maintained anything. Ask the residents that face the parade ground about the weed growth and lack of care. Take a look at the fencing that abuts Sheridan Road. Note the LACK of anyone utilizing this amazing space. Is THIS a good use of that most amazing peice of property? This land requires passion, it is remarkable. Building a bathroom (which for the county is typically an outhouse) does not do it justice, nor does it do justice to the many Lake County residents that surround this jewel.

    Again I will address the “unwahed masses” remarks that are consistently used to defend your position. I did not make or imply any such thing. The information that I provided regarding traffic was collected by the planners that we (Lake Forest, Highland Park, Highwood, Lake County Forest preserve) utilized during our “many years” planning process. I will ask you kindly (the second time) to please refrain from attempting to put those words into my mouth. While they may flow easily from yours they do NOT from mine.

    I will say again, to both of you and to anyone else that reads this. I am NOT a golfer, I have NO skin in the game, but I am a resident of the area and the roadways that connect Fort Sheridan to the rest of the world can NOT support the kind of traffic that a fully developed “passive” forest preserve would produce. Whether it is one day a year or the MANY days I suspect would be more the case two lane residential roads can’t support the kind of use other Lake County Forest preserve facilities of that time produce.

    1. If the Forest preserve has plans for the site that are the passive plans you suggest, they should take them out of the closet and present them to the public.

    2. If the forest preserve can ask for a change in the deed restrictions than they should do so, until that time, the plan that was created and voted on by those communities that would be the most severely affected stands.

    3. The Forest preserve made a promise to me, my community, the residents in all 4 communities and to the United States Army. They recieved in excess of 250 acres of lake front property based on ONE stipulation…that they build a golf course.

    4. It has been approximately 15 years since the county took control of the property, in that time the county has built and purchased countless parcels and amenities throughout Lake County. The tax payers of this region that worked to get those 250 acres of lake front property have nothing to show for those 15 years except a 50 foot plaster eagles nest and some roadways. While those are very nice things the residents have had to endure summers worth of overgrown weeds on the parade grounds, ripped fencing along Sheridan Road and roped off regions of the area no longer usable by residents. You are right when you say that my fear of traffic has not happened, who wants to visit a weed pit? Don’t you think its time that the county properly invests in this propertY? Don’t you think residents in South Lake County deserve to have the same emenities that others in other regions can enjoy?

    I do?

    If the covenant isn’t removed build the golf course, if it is removed than just make certain that the neighborhoods that surround the “passive space” can support the traffic that space creates. Which means, it stays exactly as it stands today…because THIS is all the traffic the neighborhoods can handle. If thats acceptable to you? I can’t imagine what koolaid your drinking.


  2. Dear Lisa,

    Thank you for taking the time and bringing your passion to this discussion. The people, including yourself, who developed the Fort Sheridan plan did a great job. You confronted obstacles and attempts at land grabs by each of the neighboring communities. You arrived at plan which has produced a residential community surrounded by magnificent public access to the lake front. You are a true hero. I am serious. Thank you. Can I be anymore clear. Thank you.

    Based on your 1994 perspective, including a golf course in the plan made complete sense. But committing land use to a specific social function like golf “in perpetuity” was a public policy mistake which needs to be corrected. You just cannot responsibly ignore the challenges this sport is confronting. Golf may be a great land use for the criteria (traffic, etc.) that you describe. But it has its cost as well. And I believe that cost is untenable. That’s my opinion. And that’s probably where we will disagree.

    The alternative to a golf course is, what the LCFPD calls, a traditional forest preserve. This would be a passive recreational space. Probably the single amenity required is a washroom. Trails would be groomed and planting would be consistent with a lakefront bluff. It is not true, as you state, that, “this is done without the Lake County Forest Preserve telling the constituents what they plan on doing with the property when no golf course is built or how much that will cost?”

    The other issue which you beat to death is the “Bonnie Carter 100,000 visitors” comment.

    Clearly, you have no love for Bonnie Carter. She is now history. So whatever she did is done. The Fort Sheridan Forest Preserve has been opened for a couple years. People have access to the lake front. It’s true, on weekends and nice days, the small parking lot is overflowing. But your comments are rife with fear mongering about the unwashed masses who will descend on the lake front from their hovels, creating all kinds of traffic jams and general chaos. Except for the parking, your concerns are not being realized. And if there is one day a year (Memorial Day, Independence Grove example), where traffic is intense, it is the exception to the rule.

    Without responding point by point, many of your other comments are either conjecture, revisionist thinking or simply not true (“the army has complete authority to do what it wants with the property it owns”). Nevertheless, in aggregate, you are on target.

    The future of Fort Sheridan Forest Preserve has great opportunity for Highwood. Golf is not part of the picture.

    Thanks for your thoughts.


  3. Lisa,

    Please continue with you obsessive rant in favor of a golf course. You are losing sight of the fact that LCFPD could simply ask the Army to amend the covenant to remove the golf course requirement and leave it as green space. Do you really think that the Army wants to seize this property? You my friend have been sipping the golf Kool Aid for too long.


  4. Beautifully worded, fabulously written koolaid. If the golf courses surrounding us would loose that much funding if the fort was built it would seem golf in this area might be in pretty good shape.

    Koolaid. It tastes pretty darn good, but its full of manufactored substances “engineered” to satisfy.


  5. Dear Ima,
    For the record, I live in Highwood. It is less than a square mile in space. We are one of the most culturally diverse communities in Lake County. The community is primarily made up of middle class families that go to work everyday to pay their bills. As far as a “class warfare” argument goes, that has certainly been the most effective part of the koolaid argument the Bonnie Carter clan has offered up to the residents of Lake County, shoving her finger in the direction of the residents of “tony” Fort Sheridan with the unspoken (but always right under the surface) question “why would the Lake County Forest Preserve build a golf course for THAT highbrow development?” and residents bought into that “class war” argument. It is not an argument that developed in my neck of the woods. I made no comment what so ever about undesirables in my comments. Neither did I allude, insinuate, intimate or suggest anything having to do with undesirables in my remark. That mind set came exclusively from you.
    In Highwood we have a dramatically insufficient amount of open space and recreational space to satisfy our communities needs. Had we applied through the base closure act, so many years ago, our community would have had a pretty good shot at getting the Golf course property donated to us. Catholic Charities and other homeless organizations DID get property donated to them. Instead we believed that our partners in the Joint Plan Commission (Lake Forest and Lake County Board) would keep their word and we supported the donation of the golf course to LCFP so that ALL of the residents of Lake County could benefit. In other words Ima, we worked for the broader community. We created a plan that worked for the entire county, inviting everyone, to the exclusion of no one. It could have been dramatically different. Read on!
    Here are a few things pertaining to the closing of Fort Sheridan that seem to have been lost to time:
    The John Buck company had a deal with the United States Army to exchange the entire Fort for 8 acres in Virginia. All four communities (Lake Forest, Highland Park, Highwood and Lake County Board) voted to support that plan. The plan included building 2500 (yes that number IS correct) pods or houses all over the fort, including on the golf course. Senator John Glen (then in charge of the Military portion of the congressional budget) put a stop to that plan. The truth is whether the communities had voted for the plan or not, had Senator Glen not put a stop to it, the Army owned the property and the army could do with the property whatever it wanted. The army has total authority to do what it wants with the property it owns (see the industrial uses they allowed on a closed base in Virginia.) I mention this, because if the Lake County Board does not honor the covenant the United States army can take the property back. Simple as that! Remember, the Army donated the property with one stipulation, that a golf course be maintained in perpetuity. The 3 surrounding communities, terrified at how catastrophic a 2500 unit development would be to their communities tax base (schools, roadways, city services et al) worked to get the property donated to the county (that had offered to pay 10 million) and worked to keep the use of the property consistent with what the communities, roadways, and neighborhoods could support AND what would be the most beneficial to the county.

    The plan that the Joint Plan Commission came up with was created by the same golf course planners that planned the Pebble Beach Golf course in California. It was to be a golf course that attracted tourism to the county and enriched but did not negatively impact the residential neighborhoods that surround the property. It included open space and walkways and the lake front property that the county did not want has already been transformed into useable open space. The plan called for managed traffic and use. Now…so many years later, after Lake County has seen the success of their properties like Independence absolutely LOVELY development built from sand pits… they want to build something that will attract 100,000 people to an area that CAN NOT SUPPORT the traffic that would be generated by that many people. I don’t know WHAT they want to build or what it would cost, because they haven’t shared that with their constituents, they are just determined that it not be a golf course.

    Here’s the problem, the covenant says they have to maintain a golf course. They’ve stripped the old course moving greens to Thunderhawk and elsewhere and If they do not build a golf course, the army can take the property back. Then the county loses, the neighborhoods lose, the communities lose and the tax payers of Lake County, who should be hungry for tourist dollars (money from outside of the communities that benefit all the communities) all lose. Already it has been established that wild life will be sustained with a golf course (if the wildlife is there now, the wildlife lived side by side with the previously existing golf course for 60 plus years) so what’s the problem?

    I agree with Mr. Cohen who says that a 9 hole golf course would NOT be well supported. One has to wonder if they want to build something that is guaranteed to fail so they can make their point (a golf course can’t sustain itself in today’s economy.) The truth is NO nine hole golf course would be successful under any economy. A nine hole golf course is an excellent way to waste the taxpayers money and use this beautiful property in the least advantagous way. An 18 hole course advantages everyone. It will draw tourism tax dollars to the region, continue to offer lake front vistas (that are also part of the promise that the county made to the surrounding communities) and afford managed traffic to an area surrounded by residential roadways. So why all the many years drama?
    I think your comments hit the nail on the head. The problem is the counties perception that county tax dollars will pay for a golf course on the North Shore, something that has been promoted by the likes of Bonnie Carter and others whose band wagon seems always filled with koolaid. Or maybe its that developers are pushing the county to violate the covenant so that the army takes the property back and the last bit of undeveloped lake front property on Chicago’s North Shore (with a Lake Forest address) can be developed to benefit someone else (long a major concern of mine and many other politico’s in Lake Forest, Highland Park and across the region. You’d be surprised at the names.)

    I wasn’t kidding when I said koolaid, Ima. I have watched as the County spent years worth of tax dollars suing the developer over the dirt piles the county gave permission to the developer to place, using that as a reason to say “the property cost us more money than we anticipated so we can’t build the course” or hiring planning firm after planning firm to “prove” a golf course would cost too much…all the while other extremely reputable golf course planners were pointing out that the county’s presented plans were extraordinarily exaggerated.

    We took 4 years to plan the Fort Sheridan redevelopment. We considered the immediate neighborhoods and the broader Lake County community. The immediate neighborhoods (Lake Forest, Highland Park and Highwood) invited in the Lake County Forest Preserve (and with it all of Lake Counties residents) to participate in the process. Bonnie Carter has not represented the residents of this county well. If the county had built the golf course when it should have or even kept the then existing course open all of these years it is possible the cost of building the golf course would be well on its way to being paid off. But they didn’t. They have let the property run to weeds (and I mean WEEDS) affecting housing values in neighborhoods where owners invested heavily in rehabbing historic structures that are important to the entire country. The LCFP called in big names (and young children to milk the sympathy) to ask questions that led the broader public to take a position without knowing what they were getting instead.

    Let me pose some questions to you? If the United States Army donated 200 plus acres of lake front property in your neighborhood with the understanding you would always keep a golf course open do you think it would be important that you keep your word? Is it a good alternative to give the property back to the Army so that a massive number of homes can be built that would pack your streets with cars, pack your schools with more kids, or simply congest your neighborhood roadways so that getting home at night was an inconvenience and YOU had to pay for the upkeep of the 2 lane neighborhood roads that lead to the property? Or do you think some as of yet, unknown plan with an unknown cost that would invite 100,000 people down your two lane residential neighborhood roads would be a good idea and appropriate to your neighborhood?

    I don’t and once the koolaid is recognized as the Jim Jones bad brew it is, you won’t either. An 18 hole golf course is a good plan. I don’t golf. I have no stake in the golf course except that it is a perfect use for land that is located smack dab in the middle of neighborhoods with roadways that can not support the major traffic 100,000 people would produce. An 18 hole golf course is an example of good government working for the greater good…not JUST locally…but county wide.

    The last issue you raised is letting the land run fallow until the economy comes back (or the government changes AGAIN.) I don’t know if you are aware that the county passed a referendum years ago to pay for the development of the Fort Sheridan Property. You have been paying those taxes for approximately 10 years and the land has sat substantially vacant for all of that time. The county has bought property and spent that money throughout Lake County purchasing other property in locations far from Fort Sheridan. Don’t you think its time they started using the money they got from Lake County tax payers to redo the property and started getting a return on the donated property before they throw it all away. By the way, they will claim they have spent money at the Fort…they have. They built a roadway into the areas cemetery, they built a $50,000 Eagles nest and they also spread dirt and created gully’s that will make the building of a golf course that much more expensive. They have misused and abused my vote and your tax dollars. I am appalled.

    For those of us that spent so many years trying to do the best thing for our neck of the woods all the while recognizing that this lake front should be accessible to the entire area it has been really hard to watch the clumsiness of this now 13 year process. Lake County Forest Preserve needs to build an 18 hole golf course. Lake Forest needs to support it. The residents of Lake Forest will pay with traffic congestion and road way repairs if their city officials don’t. So much for a low tax base. If Lake Bluff and Lake Forest Golf courses lose tee off fees isn’t that capitalism at work? Something better comes along and unless you keep up with the competition you go the way of the of the Do Do Bird. Here’s the other reality, Lake Bluff will never have to pay for the roadway upkeep leading to Fort Sheridan. The residents of Lake Forest, Highland Park and Highwood will. Those roads can not support the cars 100,000 people would generate.

    Traffic is a sure fire way to destroy all that is good at Fort Sheridan. LCFP BUILD WHAT YOU PROMISED! Build an 18 hole golf course.


  6. Lisa,

    That is an interesting class warfare argument. Your points are valid but not entirely consistent with my point of view. Nonetheless, each of us is entitled to our own opinion. You seem to be saying that if they don’t build a golf course, the surrounding communities will be inundated by all of the undesirables from surrounding communities flocking to the lakefront.

    You also bring up an interesting point by saying “if not golf, then what”. That “what” could be easily addressed by land banking the property. Do nothing with it. No trails, no golf, no parking, nothing. Reassess the situation in 5 years to see if the golf industry has stabilized or improved.

    Making the right decision for the long term is not a character trait that elected officials usually have. This was true when the property was transferred from the Army and it is true today.


  7. In every article I have ever read regarding the golf course the writer somehow neglects to mention that both Highland Park and Lake Forest fought MIGHTILY to secure the many acres given (for free) to the Lake County Forest preserve for the specific (and guaranteed) use as a golf course. It is also interesting that this writer and many others neglect to mention Highwood and the impact the loss of the golf course will have on that community.

    Highwood agreed to the donation of the many acres of property to the Lake County Forest preserve because of the promise the LCFP made to continue the use as a golf course. I mention Highwood because without Highwood’s vote, the LCFP and the people of Lake County would not have received the land for free.
    There were many years worth of struggle to discover what use would work best for the residents of Lake county and the three surrounding communities (Lake Forest, Highland Park and Highwood.) We discussed which way the roadways would work, how the property was divided between the 3 communities and how it was developed. After many discussions, input from some of the best architects, land use planners and advisors of all kinds an 18 hole golf course and a 100% donation of the northern most property at Fort Sheridan to the Lake County Forest Preserve was deemed the highest and best use of the land and the least intrusive to the neighbors of the property. All the members of the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Commission agreed and all the members of the three communities councils and the Lake County board voted and ratified that decision. If any member of the Joint Plan Commission voted no (meaning without Highwood’s vote)… of which was my vote, the LCFP would not have gotten the property. By law, all three of the communities had to agree or there was no decision. Now, after the County threw away years worth of time and money (closing the existing golf course multiple years back and loosing that sustaining income) they are backing off the promise they made to the United States Army to get the property for free and the promise they made to Highwood and the other communities. The Lake County board has done this by including a community, Lake Bluff, that is miles away from Fort Sheridan. They didn’t include Bannockburn, which could be impacted by west to east traffic down 22, they didn’t include Vernon Hills (Rt. 60), they only included Lake Bluff. The deck has been stacked so that the promise the LCFP and Lake Forest made will not be honored.

    What is perhaps the most fascinating thing in this many years drama is that ALL of this is done without the Lake County Forest Preserve telling the constituents what they plan on doing with the property when no golf course is built or how much that will cost? Local residents and county residents are buying into Bonnie Carters “save the birds” hype without knowing what plans she has for the property. Could it be a great example of a bait and switch. Will she tell you she doesn’t know? Wouldn’t THAT be a perfect example of bad government? Don’t do this thing because it will cost too much…we can do the other…we don’t know what the other is… or what it will cost…but it most certainly will be better? What kind of koolaid is she serving?

    LCB President Bonnie Carter has said publicly she wants 100,000 visitors to the Fort Sheridan property every year. I am certain all of the Lake County residents that are fighting the “managed traffic” afforded by an 18 hole golf course are looking forward to all of those cars driving down Old Elm, and Sheridan Road trying to get into the only Lake Front property that is publicly accessible (WITHOUT A CITY STICKER) from Waukegan to Chicago. I am certain Lake Forest residents are relishing the idea of paying (through their local taxes) for the upkeep of those neighborhood roads traversed by so many residents from all over Lake County. Bravo to the public officials that are worried about the loss of golfing revenues when the real monetary cost is going to come out of Lake Forest and Highland Park city tax revenues to fix roads that are built for local traffic but will be supporting Highway like traffic every summer all summer long.

    The Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Commission that included Lake Forest Mayor Rhett Butler, Lake Forest Alderman Abigail Fausnaught, Highland Park Mayor’s Raymond Geraci and Dan Pierce, Highland Park Councilmen Pete Koukas, Lake County Forest Preserve member Mary Beatty, and Lake County Forest Preserve President Bob Buhai, Highwood Mayor John Sirotti and myself spent years looking, asking and investigating all the effects different scenario’s would have on the neighborhoods surrounding Fort Sheridan. An 18 hole golf course had the least traffic impact for local neighborhoods and afforded all of Lake County residents with Lake front access. The donation of the lake front to open lands and the additional open land throughout the closed base (land that the Forest preserve did not want) guaranteed wild life protection. Yet somehow somebody is trying to sell tainted kool aid to Lake County residents that an 18 hole golf course built at Fort Sheridan will cost their local golf course money and have a negative impact on wild life. Just so residents that are not familiar with Fort Sheridan know, there was a golf course at the fort for 60 plus years and all the birds, vegetation and wild life survived. In fact, had the golf course had a negative impact the wild life certainly would be long gone by now.

    The residents surrounding Fort Sheridan should be concerned. From west of 41, down Old Elm Road and Green Bay and Sheridan Road and Wesley and Summit all those residents (constituents and Lake County Forest Preserve taxpayers) should be fighting like crazy to ensure that the golf course is built. They should be very very concerned that anything other than an 18 hole golf course is built at Fort Sheridan. It is something the entire county can use while not impacting residential neighborhoods with carloads filled with the 100,000 people Bonnie Carter wants to invite in. Every other one of the counties major parks are built on roads that are NOT residential. The roads surrounding Fort Sheridan are and the roads surrounding Fort Sheridan are all roads belonging to the 3 communities that worked to get the Fort Sheridan property donated to all the residents of Lake County. Without their vote, the county would have paid $10 million dollars for the property. That $10 million would have come out of the pockets of all of Lake County residents.

    Put the Bonnie Carter kool aid down folks and think traffic. Ask Bonnie how much she is going to spend to attract the 100,000 people to Fort Sheridan? Ask the county board the one question no one has asked yet “if not the golf course you promised to get the land for free, what is it you are building?”

    For all the neighbors of the Fort, if you don’t fight to have a golf course, you’ll have more company than you can stand every weekend of the summer. For all the neighbors of the Fort Sheridan land (this would not include Lake Bluff) demand that the county keep it’s word. Otherwise, for all the neighbors of Fort Sheridan, make sure you plan to spend summer holidays elsewhere and plan on leaving early because once day break comes you will not be able to get out of your driveways. If you doubt what I am saying…take a drive to Independence Grove next Memorial Day and see how long the line of traffic is. Then imagine that traffic at your front door.


  8. [What part of “covenant” do you people choose not to understand?]

    That is a core question isn’t it? And the legal and practical answer lies in a covenant that seems unreasonable is one that becomes unenforceable. One such example of an unreasonable covenant is when it puts an undue or unanticipated burden on the public. Such as a commitment to permanent and ongoing financial subsidy. Of course whether this applies to the proposed golf course at Fort Sheridan would have to be decided by a court. No amount of bickering among the parties will resolve that. And taking this to court would only exacerbate this tragic mis-allocation of time and resources.

    I believe the other question you might ask is what part of “golf course” do you people not understand. I would assume that you would accept a 4 hole golf course on the parade grounds as meeting the covenant which pays equal attention to the requirement for a golf course as it does to “recreational open space.” While that would meet the covenant requirements, it would be another dumb decision.

    Of course, in the end this doesn’t matter as Commissioner Bassi has elected to support the development of a golf course you probably wouldn’t want to golf on more than a couple times for novelty purposes. And there is no private entity that will build this course under the terms the county will specify. So the point is moot.

    Thanks for contributing. Happy Thanksgiving.


  9. Shame on Anne! She caved in to the pressure put on her by the thugs that head up the homeowners association. She is not being fiscally responsible to all of her constituents. Instead, look at how much she is costing Lake Forest, Lake Bluff, and Highland Park.

    What she did do is to move the burden of saying no onto another party (in common political parlance, that is known as “passing the buck”). By agreeing to fund only via option 3, she knows that there in no operator in the country that would take on such a money loser.

    Therefore, when the project goes out to RFP (it will probably cost in the 6 figure range to prepare the RFP package) and there are no responses where the developer agrees to bear the risk of ALL of the expenses (both capital and operating), she will be able to say “we tried” and will be able to gracefully exit without over taking the hard step of actually making a decision.

    Perhaps I will run for her office in the next election. I am more than willing to make the tough decisions that are in the best interests of the majority of my constituents and not jut a very vociferous minority.


  10. It is now very simple to determine who does not deserve our votes in the next election. That is the only tool we have when it comes to poor representation.


Oh yeah? Well tell us what you think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s